1 / 18

M2M Architecture

M2M Architecture. Inge Grønbæk, Telenor R&I. ETSI Workshop on RFID and The Internet Of Things, 3rd and 4th December 2007 . Outline. Introduction Ubiquitous topology examples Service requirements and API Role of API and example service Requirements Service aggregation and sub-layering

kinsey
Download Presentation

M2M Architecture

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. M2M Architecture Inge Grønbæk, Telenor R&I ETSI Workshop on RFID and The Internet Of Things, 3rd and 4th December 2007

  2. Outline • Introduction • Ubiquitous topology examples • Service requirements and API • Role of API and example service • Requirements • Service aggregation and sub-layering • RESTful approach to API • Allocation of functionality to each layer • Architecture • New network elements • Allocation of functionality to network elements • Protocol stacks • Reference points and interfaces • NGN and IMS capabilities • Implementation • Alternatives for concrete API RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

  3. Example Architecture RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

  4. Leaf topology – (Ref.FP6 IP “RUNES”) Telco hub Device Network Service C co co co RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

  5. Functionality and network elements RVS: Rendezvous Server RH: Resolution Handler ONS: Object Naming Server GW: Gateway RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

  6. HIT gateway • The HIT gateway supports global addressing while allowing IPv4 addresses. (A single public IP-address is assigned to a gateway potentially controlling large group of COs.) • The gateway applies the HIT (Host Identity Tag) for addressing and/or identifying the actual CO. • The HIT gateway also support localized mobility management as the IP-address of a CO would only change when the CO moves outside the control of its current gateway. • The HIT gateway shall keep track of the location of all COs under its control. • Each gateway shall be allocated a coverage area allowing identification of objects within that area. • Each gateway shall furthermore keep track of all its physical neighbours to allow extended area search for COs. RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

  7. HIT gateway protocol stack RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

  8. Host Identity Protocol security architecture Host Identity (HI) is public/private key pair: IP header HIT is implied by the SPI value in IPsec header HIP incurs no per-packet overhead IPSec (ESP) Public key used by others to authenticate control messages Identity defined by holder of private key Encrypted Header and Transport Payload SHA-1 hash of public key forms a “Host Identity Tag (HIT)” - used where 128 bit fields are needed - self-referential (i.e., HIT can be securely used instead of HI) RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

  9. Rendezvous Server (RVS) • The basic functionality of the Rendezvous Server (RVS) is to offer mobility- and multicast group anchoring, i.e. Maintenance of the HIT to address bindings. • It will also engage in location of COs outside gateway control. • It may also be engaged in traffic forwarding in cases where privacy is required. • Event reporting shall also be handled by the RVS serving the target CO (i.e. the CO at which events are monitored for reporting). • The Registrar and notification functionality is located at the RVS. RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

  10. Name resolution (additional to DNS) • Resolution Handler (RH) • URI -> (HI -> HIT) -> IP address -> CO characteristics (e.g. protocol stack support) • Object Name Server (ONS) • EPC -> EPC-IS (EPC Information Service offered by manager) • EPC-DS (EPC Discovery Services ) an application. RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

  11. GPRS/HIP interworking protocol stack RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

  12. CO reference points RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

  13. Interface at reference point A • The initial interface and protocol stack at reference point A is based on the IP protocol as shown in the figure. The choice of lower layer (i.e. sub IP) protocol is not restricted at the interface. RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

  14. Interface at reference point B • The figure depicts the protocol stack at the CO-core to CO-core NNI. (is considered the best choice to meet the generic CO requirements in the short timeframe). RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

  15. Interface at other reference points • The interface at reference point C equals reference point B. • The interface at reference point D equals reference point A. • The interface at reference point E is currently proprietary, but the HIT gateway architecture defined in this document to be applied for mapping between the interface at reference point E and the interface at reference point B (=C). • The interface at reference point F equals the reference point B. • The interface at reference point G equals reference point B. HIT based nodes communicate transparently (e.g. via or helped by the RVS). The GPRS HIT gateway provides interconnect of the GPRS and CO architectures allowing native non HIT GPRS nodes to communicate with HIT COs. • The interface at reference point H is identical to reference point B/C except for the radio access. RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

  16. NGN and IMS capabilities • IMS may be used to support the functionality of the CO service-primitives. • The major challenge is to handle small amounts of real-time data efficient within the session oriented framework of IMS. • The Use of the SIP MESSAGE method for such data exchange is a possible solution. • A better solution would be to offer a general QoS controlled connectionless service at the network layer, i.e. the IP bearer. • The session orientation of IMS makes it very suitable for high volume streaming, but multicast is missing for low volume transient real-time data. • The bottom line is that IMS supports high volume streaming very well, but IMS needs to be upgraded to effectively support the class of non session oriented applications. RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

  17. Alternative concrete API approaches (1) • Web Services • Parlay • CORBA (too heavy) • Parlay-X (For IMS service access) • Based on SOAP • REST (excluding SOAP envelope) • J2ME (Not mature before 2010) • Native APIs (required for constrained applications) RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

  18. Summary of supported functionality • Ubiquitous (cross domain) support of CO services. • Name and addressing flexibility, e.g. not limited by IP constraints. • New services require only additional data definitions and builds on existing service components accessed via standard API. • CO service connectivity with UMTS/GPRS. • Access to OSA Parlay functionality. • Security. • Privacy (in terms of location and identity). • Mobility management (including network mobility). • M:N multicast also for mobile objects. • Presence, location and Notification. • Efficient interfacing of proprietary and/or power constrained devices. • Protocol-stack flexibility. • Topological hierarchy RFID and The Internet Of Things, ETSI, December 2007

More Related